Study – Relevance of Neuroinflammation and Encephalitis in Autism
Published online 2016 Jan 19
Abstract
In recent years, many studies indicate that children with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) diagnosis have brain pathology suggestive of ongoing neuroinflammation or encephalitis in different regions of their brains. Evidence of neuroinflammation or encephalitis in ASD includes: microglial and astrocytic activation, a unique and elevated proinflammatory profile of cytokines, and aberrant expression of nuclear factor kappa-light-chain-enhancer of activated B cells. A conservative estimate based on the research suggests that at least 69% of individuals with an ASD diagnosis have microglial activation or neuroinflammation. Encephalitis, which is defined as inflammation of the brain, is medical diagnosis code G04.90 in the International Classification of Disease, 10th revision; however, children with an ASD diagnosis are not generally assessed for a possible medical diagnosis of encephalitis. This is unfortunate because if a child with ASD has neuroinflammation, then treating the underlying brain inflammation could lead to improved outcomes. The purpose of this review of the literature is to examine the evidence of neuroinflammation/encephalitis in those with an ASD diagnosis and to address how a medical diagnosis of encephalitis, when appropriate, could benefit these children by driving more immediate and targeted treatments.

Flu shots with side-effects on offer again
Natasha Bita, Consumer Editor
TheAustralian – 12:00AM February 16, 2012
Perth mother Kirsten Button, whose toddler Saba suffered brain damage after her Fluvax shot in 2010, said yesterday she was “shocked” the government would award the contract to CSL when it did not know why Fluvax had caused so many febrile convulsions. “What assurance does the public have, when they have not explained to us what happened with Fluvax in the first place?” Ms Button said.
She said Saba had been in perfect health before her flu shot, but 16 hours later was on life support, with brain injury and organ damage.
Now two months shy of her third birthday, Saba has epilepsy and is fed through a tube.
“She doesn’t talk, she doesn’t walk, she doesn’t eat and she can’t see properly,” Ms Button said. However, the little girl does occasionally reward her parents with a smile.
CSL was awarded the $117m contract in December, and the information was published on the federal government’s tender database last Friday.
Sanofi-Aventis was awarded a $69.5m contract while GlaxoSmithKline received a $14.7m contract – both to supply seasonal and pandemic flu vaccines for five years.
The contracts coincide with a new TGA review that reveals the risk of side-effects in adults from Fluvax in 2010 was “modestly higher” than for two rival brands.
Fluvax was 14.5 times more likely to cause a headache and nine times more likely to cause fatigue than Vaxigrip.
The data – based on an analysis of “adverse events” in adults vaccinated during the 2010 flu season – reveals Fluvax was 4.4 times more likely to cause vomiting and 10.7 times more likely to cause injection site pain than Influvac, made in The Netherlands for Abbott Australasia.

Lessons learnt in Japan from adverse reactions to the HPV vaccine: a medical ethics perspective
Abstract
The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been linked to a number of serious adverse reactions. The range of symptoms is diverse and they develop in a multi-layered manner over an extended period of time. The argument for the safety and effectiveness of the HPV vaccine overlooks the following flaws: (i) no consideration is given to the genetic basis of autoimmune diseases, and arguments that do not take this into account cannot assure the safety of the vaccine; (ii) the immune evasion mechanisms of HPV, which require the HPV vaccine to maintain an extraordinarily high antibody level for a long period of time for it to be effective, are disregarded; and (iii) the limitations of effectiveness of the vaccine. We also discuss various issues that came up in the course of developing, promoting and distributing the vaccine, as well as the pitfalls encountered in monitoring adverse events and epidemiological verification.

VaxXed Stories: Jena in Seattle
Jena shares the story of her two boys vaccine injuries with the VaxXed team in Seattle, Washington. Camera and editing by Joshua Coleman

Study – Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism
April 21, 2015
Abstract
Importance Despite research showing no link between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism spectrum disorders (ASD), beliefs that the vaccine causes autism persist, leading to lower vaccination levels. Parents who already have a child with ASD may be especially wary of vaccinations.
Objective To report ASD occurrence by MMR vaccine status in a large sample of US children who have older siblings with and without ASD.
Design, Setting, and Participants A retrospective cohort study using an administrative claims database associated with a large commercial health plan. Participants included children continuously enrolled in the health plan from birth to at least 5 years of age during 2001-2012 who also had an older sibling continuously enrolled for at least 6 months between 1997 and 2012.
Exposures MMR vaccine receipt (0, 1, 2 doses) after 1 year of age.
Main Outcomes and Measures ASD status defined as 2 claims with a diagnosis code in any position for autistic disorder or other specified pervasive developmental disorder (PDD) including Asperger syndrome, or unspecified PDD (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification 299.0x, 299.8x, 299.9x).
Results Of 95 727 children with older siblings, 994 (1.04%) were diagnosed with ASD and 1929 (2.02%) had an older sibling with ASD. Of those with older siblings with ASD, 134 (6.9%) had ASD, vs 860 (0.9%) children with unaffected siblings (P < .001). MMR vaccination rates (≥1 dose) were 84% (n = 78 549) at age 2 years and 92% (n = 86 063) at age 5 years for children with unaffected older siblings, vs 73% (n = 1409) at age 2 years and 86% (n = 1660) at age 5 years for children with affected siblings. MMR vaccine receipt was not associated with an increased risk of ASD at any age. For children with older siblings with ASD, at age 2, the adjusted relative risk (RR) of ASD for 1 dose of MMR vaccine vs no vaccine was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.48-1.22; P = .25), and at age 5, the RR of ASD for 2 doses compared with no vaccine was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.30-1.04; P = .07). For children whose older siblings did not have ASD, at age 2, the adjusted RR of ASD for 1 dose was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.68-1.20; P = .50) and at age 5, the RR of ASD for 2 doses was 1.09 (95% CI, 0.76-1.54; P = .65).
Conclusions and Relevance In this large sample of privately insured children with older siblings, receipt of the MMR vaccine was not associated with increased risk of ASD, regardless of whether older siblings had ASD. These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD.

Says 1 in 45 Children Now Have Autism. Don’t Worry, Nothing To See Here
Published December 8, 2015
A total of 2.24% of U.S. children (1 in 45 children) aged 3 to 17 years have autism spectrum disorder (ASD), according to new statistics released by the 2014 National Health Interview Survey. The new figure is up from 1.25% reported from 2011 to 2013. The prevalence of developmental delay fell to 3.57% from 4.84%, while the rate of intellectual disability remained virtually unchanged at 1.1%.1
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) attributes the significant jump in autism rates on the new format of the survey, which asked parents about autism before asking them if their child had an “other developmental delay.”1 In other words, the change in the order of the questions in the survey may have influenced parents to more likely report autism.
Regardless of the revised question ordering, the rates of autism have continued to increase dramatically during the past three decades:

1980’s: Two studies (1987 & 1989) found 1 in 2500-3000 U.S. children had autism2 3
2000: American Academy of Neurology and Child Neurology Society estimate 1 in 500 US children had autism. 2003-2004: Study (2006) revealed 1 in 188 U.S. children had autism5
2007: CDC states 1 in 150 U.S. children had autism6
2009: CDC states 1 in 110 U.S. children had autism7
2012: CDC states 1 in 88 U.S. children had autism8
2014: CDC states 1 in 68 U.S. children aged eight had autism9

Even though in 2014, the CDC “officially” admitted that 1 in 68 US children eight years old were found to have autism, in 2013 a CDC national health survey found that 1 in 50 children between the ages of 6 and 17 were diagnosed with ASD in 2011-2012.10 The authors of that 2013 federal health survey stated that:
The reported prevalence of ASD has increased in recent decades. For example, data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) revealed a nearly fourfold increase in parent-reported ASD between the 1997–1999 and 2006–2008 surveillance periods, and CDC’s Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network revealed a 78% increase in ASD prevalence between 2002 and 2008.

MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS LLP Files Lawsuits For A Hundred Individuals Against Merck Alleging Shingles/Zostavax Vaccine Is Defective*
MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS LLP, the attorneys who last month filed their first complaint in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas on behalf of Jorja Bently, today have filed complaints for another 100 plaintiffs against Merck regarding its Shingles vaccine, Zostavax. The assertions are wide ranging and include plaintiffs claiming to have suffered various side effects which include contracting shingles, chickenpox, high blood pressure, intense neuropathic pain, eye injuries, headaches, dizziness amongst others.
It is alleged by Marc J. Bern & Partners LLP that “Merck knew and had reason to know that its Zostavax vaccine was inherently defective and unreasonably dangerous as designed” that “Merck downplayed the serious and dangerous side effects of its product to encourage sales of the product; consequently, Merck placed its profits above its customers’ safety.” According to founding Partner Marc J Bern, the firm is currently representing nearly 5000 claimants and has thousands more filings to follow. “We have been investigating this drug for quite some time. We steadfastly believe in the merits of this litigation. This vaccination is at best 50 percent effective. Either it is not effective or it causes shingles or a host of other side effects. What is most troubling is that Merck had a better alternative on hand when this product was released.” says Bern.

Thousands Sue Merck for Shingles Vaccine “Causing What It’s Supposed to Prevent”
By Annabelle Bamforth – April 22, 2017
Merck has explicitly stated that those who receive the Zostavax vaccine “may still get shingles.” However, Bouk argued that some people may be contracting shingles as a side effect of the vaccine itself due to the live virus strain in the vaccine, not because people are experiencing shingles despite the vaccine.
Bouk went on to say that “there is a study out there that shows that in 50% of the patients that actually get the vaccine, that sometimes they don’t get shingles — the virus goes straight to manifesting in the central nervous system. It’s possible that you could get the vaccine and get meningitis or encephalitis without ever actually exhibiting shingles.” Bouk advises that patients weigh the risks of Zostavax before receiving the vaccine.
While GSK seeks approval of Shingrix, which could lead to their product edging out Zostavax, a large number of claims have been filed against Merck. The Mark J. Bern Partners law firm “is currently representing nearly 5000 claimants and has thousands more filings to follow.”

Shingles Vaccine Zostavax Is Causing What It’s Designed To Prevent
April 19, 2017
By now I think most people have seen the commercials on television telling us that if we’ve ever had the chicken pox at any point in our lives, then the shingles virus is already inside of us. As it stands right now, there is a vaccine for shingles called Zostavax, but what we’re finding out now about this vaccine makes it seem like it might be pretty dangerous or at least cause some side effects that are actually the same as what we’d see from shingles. Ring of Fire’s Farron Cousins talks with Attorney Troy Bouk about the dangers associated with Zostavax.

INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW STATES – IT IS ILLEGAL TO TAKE AWAY ANYONES RIGHT OF INFORMED CONSENT! THAT LAW STILL STANDS!
Informed Consent!
The Supreme Court has spoken: even a “…diminished expectation of privacy does not diminish [your] privacy interest in preventing a government agent from piercing [your] skin…. this Court has never retreated from its recognition that any compelled intrusion into the human body implicates significant, constitutionally protected privacy interests…” (Missouri v McNeely, 2013
members of the public have the right to make informed consent decisions, even if a decision may be considered a “bad” decision by the Government. The Supreme Court indicated, in Thompson v Western States 2016Significantly, there is also the UN Declaration on BioEthics, negotiated in Geneva, using language similar to the Nuremberg Code and clearly applies to both treatment and experiment:

Article 6 – “Consent – 1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice. 2. Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent. Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice.

You Can Say NO, To Forced Vaccination And Suffer No Penalty. But, You Have To make A Statement In A Legal Way, In A Specific Way,